Who Can You Sue When It's Your Own Copy Protection That Hurt Your Reputation?

from the sue-everyone! dept

Video game maker Ubisoft has a rather long history of employing crappy DRM (and then even using someone else's code to crack their DRM when it caused problems for legitimate customers). However, this latest story involving a Ubisoft copy protection scheme may be the most bizarre. Chris Gruel writes in to let us know that Ubisoft is suing the CD duplicator firm it used to produce the video game Assassin's Creed, claiming that employees from that firm were responsible for the game leaking to the internet. It appears they have pretty good evidence that this did, in fact, happen (the leak was traced to an IP address controlled by an employee of the firm, and a copy of the game was found at that employee's home). So you can understand why they'd be upset about that (though, they had to realize that it would be pirated eventually).

However, here's where the story gets bizarre. Because Ubisoft was afraid that this might happen, the pre-release copy it sent to the CD duplicator included (on purpose!) a bug that would crash the game partway through. That was the copy that the employee leaked, so Ubisoft is complaining that this leak harmed their reputation, because people claimed the game was really buggy and crashed. Try to keep this straight in your mind here. Ubisoft put their own (crude, yes) DRM on the game because they were afraid it would leak. The game was leaked, and the DRM acted exactly as intended, and thus Ubisoft's reputation was harmed.

It makes you shake your head in wonder.

If Ubisoft had not included this DRM, then it would apparently have less to complain about. Thus, I think the only logical conclusion is that Ubisoft should be suing itself for including such damaging DRM on its own pre-release copies of Assassin's Creed.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    eleete, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 5:10pm

    Willtons WebSite ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 5:17pm

    IIRC, that one ranting developer of Titan Quest made similarly funny claims.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 5:18pm

    Err, ranting CEO, apparently.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Paul, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 5:38pm

    I'm confused

    I don't get it. They sent a bugged copy of the game to the CD duplicator... what were they supposed to do with it? It couldn't be duplicated cause it was purposely buggy.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    eleete, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 6:03pm

    Re: I'm confused

    You are free to replicate buggy code. Although that is interesting, why not copyright or patent buggy code, and sue those who use it ?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Aug 8th, 2008 @ 6:06pm

    Re: I'm confused

    Yeah, what if they pressed that copy to disc?

    Lesson here is that if you're a disc presser, don't deal with Ubisoft. You're going to get screwed.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    eleete, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 6:10pm

    Re: Re: I'm confused

    you mean sued.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 6:20pm

    Re: I'm confused

    Apparently, they released a patch on the day the game came out that fixed this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Aug 8th, 2008 @ 6:37pm

    Re: Re: I'm confused

    They released a patch that fixed the leaked version?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous of Course, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 6:58pm

    Re: Re: Re: I'm confused

    Get the patch to play the entire game.
    It's like a key.

    The idea is this, no one can play the entire
    game until the patch is released. So in a
    sense the CD is a demo version that can be
    upgraded to the full version.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anon, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 8:58pm

    There must be a better method of DRM on games

    I understand that DRM doesn't deter anyone intent on cracking it, but it does prevent casual sharing of games. For example, one of my friends bought Oblivion which has absolutely no DRM or copy protection, only a simple disc check. Now all my friends and I have made copies of the disc. Why did we do it? Because it was easy and didn't even risk us getting caught because there was no cracked anything to download.

    If there was anything in place to try to stop me from copying the disc, I would have not even bothered and bought the game instead.

    I think the biggest issue comes with single-player only games or games that most people won't play online anyway. With multiplayer games, it's easy to prevent sharing because the cd key is sent to the servers, and the game devs can simply deny anyone access if a key is already in use. They can even completely revoke a key if they see it coming from many different ip addresses.

    I don't know what the perfect solution is, but there must be something.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Michael, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 10:23pm

    Re: There must be a better method of DRM on games

    CD Keys to prevent online playing isn't always effective either. There are tons of games that can still be hacked and played online. Games where you host on your computer are the easiest for hackers. A little bit of hacking and the game thinks it gets an ok from the master server that the key is ok. Most of the first person shooters have been hacked and are played online.

    The toughest method for most games would be one where you have to log into a master server and start hosting a games from in there. That way the hacker can't get into a game lobby to host or play.

    When ever they come up with a protection for locally played games they seemed to get hacked. It will always be this way.

    The security on consoles may push a lot of game developers to abandon most computer based games. Consoles are by no means immune to hacking but it is definately a lot more complicated for the average game player.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 11:50pm

    Re: Re: There must be a better method of DRM on games

    Modchip

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 8th, 2008 @ 11:51pm

    Re: Willtons WebSite ?

    Ahh, a sign of all that is wrong with america. What is up with this "Who can I sue" attitude?

    Screw that!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    SRNissen, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 1:07am

    Usually, I don't care at all about copyright, but: This is not a copyright issue, this is a contract issue.

    Ubisoft released buggy code to the OEM. The OEM promised to take security measures X, Y and Z so the buggy code wouldn't get released to the public. There will be an analogy at the bottom of this post. Anyway, the OEM failed to take measures Y and Z, which they were contracted to do. This resulted in the release of buggy code attributed to Ubisoft. As a consequence, Ubisoft is suing for damages caused by this breach of contract.

    Analogy: You build a great mock-up of a car. The powered windows don't work and the transmission still hasn't been implemented, so it will only go in 3rd gear. Also: No brakes. Somebody steals (yes yes I know scarce goods contra etc.) this car from the person who promised to guard it for you, because the guard was sitting on his ass, reading Vanity Fair. The thief proceeds to lend this car to every car magazine in the world, then... returns it to you or something so you can fix it and release it "for real." The analogy falls apart because of the Scarce Goods theme, but really, that's an OK analogy. Whether I built a crappy car, or intentionally handicapped my car so a would-be thief couldn't use it, it's still the job of the guard to make sure it isn't stolen - that's what he's being paid for, and if he doesn't, I can sue for damages.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Aug 9th, 2008 @ 5:08am

    Re: Re: There must be a better method of DRM on games

    Why should there be DRM in the first place? The thing that developers never seem to get into their thick skulls is that the *only* people that DRM ever affects is paying customers. I'm penalised if I want to play a game on my laptop while away from home, only to find out I need the CD sitting in a drawer 500 miles away. I'm not allowed to play some older games I can no loner find. Yet, if I'd have just downloaded the pirated version instead of paying good money, I'd not have these problems.

    Developers can easily protect their content by other means. Whether it's subscriptions and/or membership for online play, extra downloadable content that depends on validating a purchase or simply making a great game, they can get lots of sales.

    The trick is not to make the games more difficult to install and play than the pirated version. The only way to do this is to not include DRM.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    icon
    PaulT (profile), Aug 9th, 2008 @ 6:27am

    Re: Re: Re: There must be a better method of DRM on games

    Dunno what happened there, that should have read:

    "I'm not allowed to play some older games I can no longer find the manuals for, as I need to enter codes before I can play."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 6:45am

    Re:

    So Vanity Fair should sue the car magazines for copyright infringement?

    I'm lost in that analogy, and I can't get out!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Todd Loren SInlair, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 7:34am

    The DRM model needs to change to -

    Look... the fact is no matter what they do someone will crack it.

    People that use pirated software weren't going to buy it in the first place.

    So .... take out the expense of installing and managing DRM and you're still ahead of the game. (pun)

    If you must have DRM ... the only thing that comes close to working is an activation type scheme like Microsoft uses ... its not a %100 but it makes it too difficult for most people to attempt.

    You can't stop real pirates.

    This whole lawsuit article just points out what a bad decision DRM is.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 10:41am

    Re: The DRM model needs to change to -

    "If you must have DRM ... the only thing that comes close to working is an activation type scheme like Microsoft uses ... its not a %100 but it makes it too difficult for most people to attempt."

    LOL Microsoft Activation, really what more is there to say.

    Microsoft products are arguably the most pirated software on Earth.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    dan, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 2:39pm

    The only effective way to prevent piracy is a system like Steam.

    Even then, hackers will always be one step ahead. DRM is ultimately pointless and only harms legit customers and the devs themselves.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 2:47pm

    I don't see what this has to do with DRM. Ubisoft paid the CD pressing company to safeguard its software and signed a contract on the matter. The CD pressing company violated the terms of the contract, and admitted to it. Thus the CD pressing company was at fault, and the lawsuit is valid.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 4:04pm

    Re:

    You're totally right. It's in the CD companies hands to make sure that they hire employees that aren't going to leak software for piracy. Their entire business is based off of that, so by having that leak occur in the first place, the CD company didn't do one of their main jobs. It's not Ubisoft's fault the game was linked it was the CD companies, and Ubisoft deserve some sort of compensation because of that.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Lex, Aug 9th, 2008 @ 5:50pm

    Actually, this makes sense to me. Their arguement is that the bugged copy that was leaked was misrepresented as the complete and finished product. Since it had the crash bug on it (which was never intended to be released to the public in the retail version of the game) it was falsley colouring the game as buggy and full of problems. This hurts Ubisoft's reputation. Either way the bug was not supposed to be part of the retail version. Imagine if they (those who leaked the game) took the finished product, and put bugs into it and passed it around as the finished game. Wouldn't that hurt Ubisoft's reputation? No matter why the bug was there, it wasn't there in the retail version. The CD company employees are at fault. I think the CD duplicating company needs to screen their employees better, or instil harsher punishments to those employees who would be so casual about ripping off one of the duplicating companies customers.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    YosefMama, Aug 10th, 2008 @ 3:40am

    uh duh

    The writer of this article is a bit excitable, to say the least. The suit makes total sense. Lex got most of the points, so I'll defer to his post.

    I hope Ubisoft gets justice.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Xanius, Aug 10th, 2008 @ 7:14am

    Re: Re: The DRM model needs to change to -

    Most pirated because it's the most used. It's like when they say the honda civic is the most stolen car, of course it is damn near everybody has one.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Co-mentor, Aug 10th, 2008 @ 10:06pm

    why bother

    Why bother suing for their reputation being damaged when they should be suing for the leak in the first place? It seems to me that this was a case of entrapment and they are just being greedy.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Spectere, Aug 10th, 2008 @ 11:10pm

    Re: uh duh

    The leak isn't the issue here.

    The problem is that Ubisoft intentionally added a bug to the code in the version that was eventually leaked. The bug that was intentionally added is the very one that they claim is ruining their reputation.

    So basically, the duplication firm is most certainly responsible for the leak. Ubisoft, however, is responsible for intentionally introducing the bug that supposedly tarnished their reputation.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    anonymous, Aug 10th, 2008 @ 11:27pm

    WTF??

    More game manufacturers should release demos that are easily accessable. Then people would have a chande to try the game first... with so many games coming out today it is hard to decide and a good demo makes us want to buy a game. No demo makes us want to just download the whole thing. Regardless of a game's reviews... when it comes to PC gaming, sometimes a game just does not run properly on your machine and a good demo gives the piece of mind that it will actually run right before dropping $50.00. As far as DRM... someone always cracks it... starting with a good business plan and being loyal to your customers is one way to build loyal fans who will want to pay money for a legit copy of the game.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    icon
    Mike (profile), Aug 11th, 2008 @ 2:00am

    Re:

    Since it had the crash bug on it (which was never intended to be released to the public in the retail version of the game) it was falsley colouring the game as buggy and full of problems.

    If Ubisoft never intended for this version to be leaked, why did it include the bug?

    If it didn't intend for the copy to get leaked, then don't include the bug and there's no problem.

    Imagine if they (those who leaked the game) took the finished product, and put bugs into it and passed it around as the finished game. Wouldn't that hurt Ubisoft's reputation?

    Yes, but that would actually be the other company's fault. In this case Ubisoft put the bug in.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 11th, 2008 @ 4:31am

    Obviously . . .

    Ubisoft should be suing its own customers, after all they are the real criminals right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Matt Bennett, Aug 11th, 2008 @ 6:57am

    The thing is, legally, Ubisoft might have a case. It's kinda like how when someone crashes their car into you, injures you, you can sue for damages. If you weren't wearing a seatbelt, you'll get more injured. That's your fault, but you still have a right to sue for the damages caused. Theoretically the defendant could point that out in court, but it never really works out that way.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    r. decline, Aug 11th, 2008 @ 8:20am

    ubi could be right?

    somebody at the cd pressing place acts illegally by sending out a copy of something they shouldn't. i'm no fan of DRM but really it seems Ubi could send them whatever they want to and if they are told to not release it, they shouldn't.
    i mean lets say its a virus and you are a storage company. if i send it to you and say, don't let anyone take this but us and you relaase it into the population, its your fault...unless maybe i cheaped out and used bob's second hand storage place, then i hold some blame for picking such a crappy place.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    PRMan, Aug 11th, 2008 @ 8:25am

    Random crashes?

    Why random crashes? I would have it come up with a screen that says, "This version of the game is a stolen pre-release copy from "CD Manufacturer" that was not intended for distribution. You will not be able to complete your game without buying a legitimate copy. Press OK to Exit."

    Isn't that better than getting a reputation for games that crash randomly?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 11th, 2008 @ 8:32am

    Re: There must be a better method of DRM on games

    You and your friends could stop stealing whenever its "easy". That might help . . . {sigh}

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 11th, 2008 @ 11:09am

    Re: Random crashes?

    Yeah I agree, personally this entire "inserting broken code" stuff smells like a load of crap to me. There are just too many more effective ways to accomplish the expressed goal here. The idea of compiling, mastering, manufacturing and distributing thousands of disks with knowingly broken code on them just seems way too rediculously stupid for me to believe anyone ever did it.


    I think these "broken code" stories have way more to do with creating an impression in the marketplace that bootleg leg code is broken code, then anything else. As a way to track and protect code, it just doesnt make any sense.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    identicon
    Phil McCraken, Aug 13th, 2008 @ 8:48am

    Re: There must be a better method of DRM on games

    I don't know what the perfect solution is, but there must be something.

    Yeah, buy the game you fucking pirate.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This